2017 Celtics Offseason: News and General Discussion
- Thread starter cardiacs
- Start date
There's no way I would include a potential lottery pick in a trade for Irving. Even IT, Crowder and Rozier seems like too much to me.
Indeed. You don't gut your team depth for Kyrie Irving. The reality is that any trade with Cleveland is hugely complicated because of the money and even with a more fair deal, you are potentially helping strengthen your main rival in the conference if only for a season. Irving has only one more year of team control than IT4 so the incremental upgrade you get by swapping them is short-lived.
I would be shocked if the Celtics somehow emerged as the top destination for Kyrie.
I would be shocked if the Celtics somehow emerged as the top destination for Kyrie.
I would do IT, Crowder, and Rozier without a second thought. Perhaps would include Clippers pick too
IT and Crowder plus a pick would be hard. Rozier in isolation isn't a big deal but all three plus a pick for two years of Kyrie Irving (and you aren't beating Cleveland in the first year with that squad) is pretty damn steep for a player who is really a marginal upgrade over your starting PG. Meanwhile, you've downgraded depth at the ballhandler spot - where many people argue the C's are thin - as well as the wing.
They are better off hoping Thomas is healthy and motivated to play for his Brinks truck and scheme to cover for his defensive limitations rather than trading away useful parts for another guy who is way more expensive and has his own set of defensive limitations.
Point guard is not a position of scarcity in the NBA. I don't think the Celtics are, under any circumstance, locked into IT.
If it's the Clippers pick, or a Boston 1st, it's an easy yes. Don't discount the value of having the inside track on re-signing Irving, who is 4+ years younger than IT.
How would people feel about IT, Crowder, and the Memphis pick? Seems like a fair balance between next year's top picks and a fairly meaningless Celtics pick.
I would do that, but I don't think that money works. Thats why Yabu and Rozier are in the conversation, or someone else at least. Not that any of those guys are must haves, but how much does one wish to weaken the depth of the team?
That might be the sweet spot and yes, I would do it. The chances of that pick being in the top 3 at some point are fairly small -- very likely the pick conveys in either 2019 (top 8 protected) or 2020 (top 6 protected). And even the rosiest scenario there -- the #7 pick in 2020 -- is a nice thing to have but almost certainly will not be another Kyrie.
The money is a real complicating factor---the guys at the back-end of the deal to make the money work (Rozier/Yabu) are guys the Celtics value, and that's a problem. They need a Tyler Zeller-like contract to add to IT/Crowder, or some other value combo. And they don't have the right contracts to do that.
If we just talk value, I think IT/Crowder and 'a little more' works for Celtics. I think that is likely better for Cleveland for this year than what they can do elsewhere---and a lot worse for Cleveland than what they can get elsehwere (agree PHO is most likely) if they are thinking longer-term.
If we just talk value, I think IT/Crowder and 'a little more' works for Celtics. I think that is likely better for Cleveland for this year than what they can do elsewhere---and a lot worse for Cleveland than what they can get elsehwere (agree PHO is most likely) if they are thinking longer-term.
A much more positive view of the Celtics's offseason from David Aldridge. Of course I'd take these ranking with several grains of salt as well.
http://www.nba.com/morning-tip-da-2017-offseason-rankings-top-10-teams
http://www.nba.com/morning-tip-da-2017-offseason-rankings-top-10-teams
You guys are so turned on by a couple of playoff performances. Why not just get rondo back got hardly anything? Not trying to be a total ass but Irving has a lot of the same issues with effort level when he's not doing exactly what he wants to do. And this shows in his stats. Now I get it, get him away from the ultimate NBA alpha and maybe his effort and results match his skills . I get the idea of letting the Cavs take on the IT decision and injury risk.
But the downside to me is that if things just replay like they did last year you are making the Cavs better.
I realize my feelings on Irving and Crowder are a 180 from the moops or hrb etc. But you guys seem patently crazy to me to want to throw so much into the hope that 2016 finals uncle Drew is just a button push away. So many games with next to nothing on the defensive end or taking so many bad shots is a little scary to me.
And all of that and I think you guys are closer to nba consensus than I am, which means the Cavs are probably going to be looking for more. There is no point in finding undervalued guys if you just bunch them up to trade them for overvalued ones. Hard pass from me, though I do enjoy watching Irving play. When he chooses to.
But the downside to me is that if things just replay like they did last year you are making the Cavs better.
I realize my feelings on Irving and Crowder are a 180 from the moops or hrb etc. But you guys seem patently crazy to me to want to throw so much into the hope that 2016 finals uncle Drew is just a button push away. So many games with next to nothing on the defensive end or taking so many bad shots is a little scary to me.
And all of that and I think you guys are closer to nba consensus than I am, which means the Cavs are probably going to be looking for more. There is no point in finding undervalued guys if you just bunch them up to trade them for overvalued ones. Hard pass from me, though I do enjoy watching Irving play. When he chooses to.
Is there anything to the thought that if he had an actual coach, his performance and effort might improve?
That's all fair. But the thing about the NBA (unlike MLB and NFL) is that you almost never win a title without a top-10 player. And rarely with only one top-25 type guy.
If you are saying that Irving isn't going to be that guy (on either list), I respect that and mostly agree. But we know for absolute sure IT and Crowder won't be either of those guys (as great as last year was, he still can't play defense and it'll be a surprise if we didn't just see his best year), and I think Irving is a lot closer to one.
I wouldn't do the deal at the price Cle is asking, but I do think the strategy for thinking about it is all about acquiring apex-level talent.
It's not just the effort. He is a pure hero ball player.
Even with one of the top 2 players of all time (who is also one of the most unselfish on-court stars in the NBA) helping to open up space for him and pick up easy assists Kyrie's advanced stats say he is not even a top 10 point guard. Over the last six years Isaiah Thomas has been a better player than Kyrie.
Kyrie reminds me a lot of what media people like Chad Ford used to say about Carmelo Anthony. There is no player in the NBA who is a better scorer in an empty gym than Melo. He has a massive array of post moves, spins, etc he can show off against a folding chair. Unfortunately for Melo and Kyrie running an offense in the NBA requires you to be a great passer as well as having moves.
If you are looking for a point guard to make a spectacular circus shot over two defenders Kyrie is your man. If you are looking for a point guard who can get his teammates easy layups then Kyrie isn't the answer.
Yeah Irving a top 10 NBA guy to me is crazy talk. I'm not sure he's been a top 5 PG. Curry and Paul clearly better to me, then he's in the group with Westbrook, Harden, Lillard, Conley, Wall, Lowry, and yes Thomas which can be arranged many ways but with Irving closer to the bottom. Even top 25 I think you have to squint and project. But of course I will grant that playing with LeBron can really work both for and against a guy in terms of what happens on the court.
This is correct, however he has been in the league for six seasons - he may have yet to peak physically - and he is what he is. As others have mentioned, he has spectacular handles and can finish as well as anyone. However, he treats defense as a tertiary hobby and has not shown that he has interest in getting others around him involved. Irving has only been in the top 20 in assists once in his career and just barely - he was 20th back in '14-15 and was way behind such NBA stars as Reggie Jackson, Evan Turner, the then fresh corpse of Deron Williams, MCW and the rotted remains of Mo Williams.
Simply put, it's questionable whether a Kyrie for Thomas makes Boston much better and clear to some of us that the potential overall cost makes them worse.
I think there is merit to the debate about Irving v. Thomas in a vacuum as to who is better. That said, I'd easily do that trade straight up, even as a fairly significant Irving detractor, because of age and ceiling. What I would not consider is adding Crowder to the deal. So, for me, the conversation on Boston's end is if there is a deal with IT, Morris, Rozier, and Larkin to make salaries work plus a pick that isn't the Lakers or Nets pick. I'd also consider including Zivic instead of Larkin and the pick, which would let the deal happen now. I don't think Cleveland says yes to that, but I think anything else that works financially involves the Celtics giving up far too much talent to get back a flawed star player.
Kyrie NBA rank by RPM the last four seasons:
#231
#38
#186
#53
The two really bad seasons (2013-14 and 2015-16) were marred by injury, but then at a certain point, even allowing for a measure of bad luck, I think it's fair to suggest that durability may not be Kyrie's strong suit. GP% by year: 62% – 89% – 87% – 91% – 65% – 88%.
If we're being optimistic, since he's only 25 and has never had a really consistent run of good health, it's probably fair to give him some untapped upside, as many have done here. But of course, upside is not always realized; and his shortcomings (as a defender, rebounder, screener, passer and all-around team player) may not be so easily overcome.
In the specific case of the Cs — with Hayward at age 27 primed to spread his wings and be the third best player in the conference — I'd also be wary about adding an ultra ball-dominant player who has explicitly asked out in order to be "the man" on his new team. I get the sense IT would be a lot more comfortable embracing the secondary role that Kyrie had in Cleveland, or that George Hill had in Utah.
Basically, I'd be hesitant to move IT for Kyrie straight up, so I'm a pretty strong no if any other pieces (especially Crowder) have to be thrown in. Given the Cavs' dearth of skilled, rugged wing defenders, I'd actually be concerned that IT+Crowder for Kyrie could tip the EC balance of power more towards the Cavs.
#231
#38
#186
#53
The two really bad seasons (2013-14 and 2015-16) were marred by injury, but then at a certain point, even allowing for a measure of bad luck, I think it's fair to suggest that durability may not be Kyrie's strong suit. GP% by year: 62% – 89% – 87% – 91% – 65% – 88%.
If we're being optimistic, since he's only 25 and has never had a really consistent run of good health, it's probably fair to give him some untapped upside, as many have done here. But of course, upside is not always realized; and his shortcomings (as a defender, rebounder, screener, passer and all-around team player) may not be so easily overcome.
In the specific case of the Cs — with Hayward at age 27 primed to spread his wings and be the third best player in the conference — I'd also be wary about adding an ultra ball-dominant player who has explicitly asked out in order to be "the man" on his new team. I get the sense IT would be a lot more comfortable embracing the secondary role that Kyrie had in Cleveland, or that George Hill had in Utah.
Basically, I'd be hesitant to move IT for Kyrie straight up, so I'm a pretty strong no if any other pieces (especially Crowder) have to be thrown in. Given the Cavs' dearth of skilled, rugged wing defenders, I'd actually be concerned that IT+Crowder for Kyrie could tip the EC balance of power more towards the Cavs.
I get all that, but they have great passing otherwise. The don't need a Stockton or Nash. And outside Blatt, he's never had a real coach. I'm not ready to put him in Carmelo territory yet.
FWIW, I think that he's behind Westbrook, Harden, and even Wall. Seems that some aren't really paying enough attention to the limited years of control that he has. He's an upgrade over IT (whom I love) and I would be willing to add some pieces to get him. But certainly not the pieces that some are throwing around. IT, plus Crowder, and Rozier AND a top pick? For an two years of control and a marginally-valuable foothold to max him, I don't get why anyone would do that.
I'm not a big Irving fan, and see no real reason for the C's to trade for him, but way people here talk about 2 years of control is crazy.
If you're unwilling to give up assets for somebody because they have "just" two years of control, you are unwilling to give up assets. Full stop. When was the last time a star was traded with more than two years left on his contract?
Sent from my Pixel using SoSH mobile app
I'm contrasting two years of control with one year of control. When discussing the upgrade from IT to Irving--which some reasonable people would argue isn't even an upgrade--the price paid should certainly depend on the years of control acquired. It's not, "I won't trade for a guy with two years control". It's "how much will I give to get one year of marginal upgrade and one additional year of control?" Because Crowder has a particular value, however you calculate it. So does Rozier, and the Nets pick, and so on. More years of Irving is worth more stuff going the other way.
When I see a "shitload of stuff going that way" deal, I'm presuming that the control years are not being factored in. Perhaps that's my bad, and some folks simply don't value IT as much or think Irving is awesome or Crowder and Rozier/Yabu aren't important, etc.
Last edited:
I agree with what you are saying in isolation but I think "we" (in the royal sense) are talking past one another right here. The pro-Kyrie to Boston folks are looking at him as a clear upgrade over Thomas and, they might be right. Its the overall package where we start to confuse things.
The discussion about control is simply about whether the cost - and its likely going to be quite steep if only to make the money work - is worth it, especially since Irving only offers you one additional year over Thomas.
As a side note, the second year becomes more key because if you have to trade Thomas, Crowder, Rozier plus to Cleveland, you are arguably making them a much deeper squad and even harder to beat in 2017-18. So you have to hope that LeBron bolts as anticipated and a Hayward-Irving-Horford plus youngster squad can ascend to the top spot in the East over the other up-and-comers in Philly and Milwaukee.
Edit: or what Jimbodandy said.
Only one additional year under contract, but if IT resigns for 4 years, you're praying that year 4 isn't a complete disaster, whereas with Kyrie you're reasonably confident that he'll be a similar player in his age 29/30 seasons.
I agree that years of control are relevant to the cost. But two years of control is, essentially, the max you'll ever get out of a star player that's being dealt. It's exceedingly rare that a star moves with 3+ years on his deal, and just as rare that one is dealt during his rookie deal. I think it's a misunderstanding of the market to look at Irving's contract length and think that should reduce the cost. If anything, the rumored cost is so high because of the contract length, not despite it.
Sent from my Pixel using SoSH mobile app
Agreed that a Thomas contract presents some real risks. That said, keeping him this year doesn't obligate the Cs to resign him and even if they do offer him a contract, it doesn't have to be four years. There are other options for the Cs that don't entail trading away significant depth for what may be, at best, a marginal upgrade.
Meh, I'd argue that Kyrie playing next to a guy with a USG% over 30 was detrimental to his numbers as he isn't involved in those plays that you claim elevates his stats. He isn't playing pick-n-roll when LeBron has the ball and the 3rd man rolling off screens or spotting up is Love, Korver, or Frye and not Kyrie.
The last six years of regular season play is meaningless to this conversation. Isaiah had his best playoff season ever this year and still wasn't close to Kyrie's impact in the playoffs. Moving forward over the next 2-4 seasons prior to Kyrie turning 30 it would likely take more Kyrie injuries (not out of the realm) for Isaiah to be a better regular season player and virtually no chance of him being a better playoff performance moving forward which for what our team goals are is what really matters. Kyrie is already the superior playoff performer that can't really be up for much debate.
The other part that is being ignored is playoff defense where Isaiah was exposed more than ever while Kyrie more than held his own and I'd even say was very good in certain games. Even if you want to say that they are equals offensively today they are NOT close to equal defensively with Isaiah so far from being competent at that end in playoff competition. This disparity only figures to grow further over the next 2-4 years with Kyrie age 25-28 and Isaiah 29-32.
When did Isaiah turn into Jason Kidd? They had similar assist numbers last year despite Kyrie having a lower usage with LeBron running 2 and 3-man games in halfcourt sets. Kyrie has singlehandedly won multiple playoff games this past spring with his "circus shots" which are fairly routine for him. Why are you penalizing him for having a higher skill level?
I don't think there is a chance in hell that Cleveland trades Kyrie to Boston but it would be a great opportunity for Ainge to move Isaiah for a better overall talent who is younger while not having to deal with that awkward FA contract with Isaiah that could lead to us moving him for lesser talent later.
Isn't this partially a function of playing next to LeBron?
I'm not sure how I feel about an Irving trade, but if it were something like IT/Crowder/Rozier and non-BRK/LAL-SAC pick, it would be tempting. The difference between Isaiah and Kyrie is negligible, and HRB makes a good point about Kyrie's playoff performance. Kyrie is young enough that he could still play with Tatum and Brown in 3-4 years from now, and likely at a higher level than what Thomas would offer you. There is obviously risk in making that deal, Kyrie has an injury history and he might not sign with you two seasons from now, but I think you make that deal if you can.
The rumored deal also includes Crowder, possibly Rozier, and the Nets pick. Seems a bit less great.
Asking for the Brooklyn pick is Altman's way of saying, "We aren't trading Kyrie to you." He knows Ainge is stockpiling lottery picks for a run at Davis or if another elite player becomes available next summer.
I agree with HRB on people's assessment of Irving is harsh. What Irving did to the Cs in game 4 when LBJ was on the bench against a Cs defense that was geared to stop only him - well, I'm not the only one who thinks that there are only a handful of players in the NBA who can score like that, and unfortunately, because of his size IT isn't one of them.
Having said that the trade isn't going to happen because the Cavs aren't doing it without one of the potential lottery picks and Danny isn't trading those for the upgrade. At least I wouldn't.
Having said that the trade isn't going to happen because the Cavs aren't doing it without one of the potential lottery picks and Danny isn't trading those for the upgrade. At least I wouldn't.
I understand the concerns about Kyrie's defense and his subpar advanced metric ratings, but that understates his value or ignores how special he is at certain things, namely: creating off the dribble and scoring in traffic. The latter skills play up in the playoffs and we have ample evidence from the past three years that he can elevates his team's play in the postseason. That doesn't necessarily mean emptying the trade coffers for him, but those that are arguing he isn't that great are missing what makes him special. In fact, he'll likely become more valuable going forward as teams continue to move to pace and space and playing multiple 3 and D wings on the floor at once as his ability to score when sets break down is going to become more rare and increasingly valuable against the very best teams.
Celtics will open the entire NBA season on the road against the Cavs on October 17th at 8 PM on TNT. They will also have a Christmas Day home game against Washington at 5:30 on ABC. That game follows the Cavs/Warriors.
Not directly related to Kyrie, but one of the reasons I wouldn't be loading up for him is I think good players on rookie deals are more likely to be available in the coming years.
With the Designated Player Exception having the rule that you're only eligible if you've been with the team since before your rookie contract expires, I think players might try to shoot their way out of bad situations.
Besides saving assets that may be used in a Kyrie trade for the Anthony Davis dream, I'd guess Kristaps Porzingis may try to force his way out of NY after another terrible season in 2017-18.
Yeah, this is why I assume it is universally known that Ainge isn't giving up any of his prized lottery picks for Kyrie. I don't expect Porzingis to leave NY though as his issue was all about Phil and not with the organization or city.
You sure about this?
I know the blame was all thrown at Phils' lap, but you're sure Porzingis trusts James Dolan to help him win?
I'd bet a third straight trash season in NY will lead to Porzingis to try and find a way out. At the very least, I don't believe Porzingis is thrilled to be there just because Phil is gone.
When was the last time the C's played at home on Christmas? I recall the 02/03 Celtics getting crushed by the Nets in the swamp, 08/09 Celtics had to play at LA for some reason even though it is unusual for the defending champs to play on the road and I know the Celts played at MSG this past Christmas.
The Celtics never played home games in Boston on Christmas Day at the request/demand of one Red Auerbach who believed strongly that the Garden workers should be home with their family on that day. Red had such pull back then that his request/demand was honored. The only home game the Celtics played on Christmas Day during Red's tenure (and I don't believe we've played one since) was in 1964 vs Detroit........and it was held at Madison Square Garden.
Well if you believe Porzingis you do. When Phil was still there, Porzingis left town without saying a word while skipping the exit interview and refusing comment. Once Phil was fired, Porzingis said he wanted to play in New York forever and that is was now home!
Porzingis challenged Dolan essentially saying it's either him or me and Dolan choose his man. That man seems very happy with how this all turned out.
On the other hand though, teams will be far less inclined to help make that happen for them because they understand the bargaining leverage they'll have in free agency.
Edit: It's also worth mentioning in this discussion how few players will actually be eligible for the designated player exception. Taking Porzingis as an example, I think we can all agree he's unlikely to ever win DPOY (even though he's solid) and MVP's a stretch too. So how likely is Porzingis to make an all NBA team over the next 5 years. There's basically 9 spots a year -- a chunk of which will be filled in perpetuity by Leonard, Davis, Towns, Durant, LeBron, Giannis, Gobert, Draymond, etc. Throw in guys like Griffin, Gordon Hayward, Embiid, Jokic, Paul George, etc. and it's entirely possible Porzingis never makes an all-NBA team, and let alone makes one in the two years before his free agency.
Last edited:
Another Kyrie tidbit from James Jones via McMenamin: he apparently went days without talking his teammates during the playoffs.
I mean, Kyrie seems like a soft-spoken and thoughtful enough fellow in interviews, but add this anecdote to the harder evidence that the Cavs have pretty consistently sucked when LeBron has been out and Kyrie has been asked to lead the team. Even if he's just a little bit of a recluse, no biggie — you're talking about him as a potential replacement for a super-charismatic and beloved emotional team leader like Isaiah Thomas.
I dunno, the whole package just seems like too much of a risk when the main selling point seems to be a handful of impressive scoring performances in the playoffs, mostly with LeBron around to set him up.
"Phoenix, of course, hired James Jones this offseason. He’s been inside that locker room. He saw Kyrie Irving in the playoffs this year—in between the first round when they beat Indiana and the second round when they played Toronto—go consecutive days without speaking to a teammate at practice. On that stage."
I mean, Kyrie seems like a soft-spoken and thoughtful enough fellow in interviews, but add this anecdote to the harder evidence that the Cavs have pretty consistently sucked when LeBron has been out and Kyrie has been asked to lead the team. Even if he's just a little bit of a recluse, no biggie — you're talking about him as a potential replacement for a super-charismatic and beloved emotional team leader like Isaiah Thomas.
I dunno, the whole package just seems like too much of a risk when the main selling point seems to be a handful of impressive scoring performances in the playoffs, mostly with LeBron around to set him up.
Last edited:
One never knows what rivalry, agenda, or just outright falsehood might influence a media report like above, even a sourced one. But that acknowledged, WOW does that make Kyrie look bad.